Abstract
While numerous meta-analyses, reviews, and task forces from various scientific bodies have linked violent media use to aggression, some studies report null effects and claim that such a relationship is non-existent. Several scholars have noted that potential methodological and statistical errors could explain failures to replicate these effects. One recent failure to replicate established violent video game effects (Przybylski and Weinstein 2019) has made its data set publicly available, thereby offering a unique opportunity to examine the hypothesis that methodological and statistical problems underlie some replication failures. The present study re-examined the original results from Przybylski and Weinstein (2019) using more appropriate analyses and replicated those results with recalculated, corrected, and more theoretically appropriate variables. The first part examines issues within the original study, including problems with the measure used to assess aggression, statistical control, and the measurement of exposure to video game violence (VGV). The second part created a more standard measure of VGV exposure to test whether the null result stemmed from this measurement issue. Overall, results demonstrate that conceptual misunderstandings of aggression, poor measures regarding both aggression and video game violence exposure, and inappropriate statistical procedures contributed to the initially reported null results. Furthermore, by using improved materials (including a more sophisticated coding scheme to assess exposure to violent video games) and sound statistical analysis (correcting for overcontrol), the data replicate the long-established relationship between playing violent video games and aggressive behavior.